Abstract
Task switch cost (the deficit of performing a new task vs. a repeated task) has been partly attributed to priming of the repeated task, as well as to inappropriate preparation for the switched task. In the present study, we examined the nature of the priming effect by repeating stimulus-related processes, such as stimulus encoding or stimulus identification. We adopted a partial-overlap task-switching paradigm, in which only stimulus-related processes should be repeated or switched. The switch cost in this partial-overlap condition was smaller than the cost in the full-overlap condition, in which the task overlap involved more than stimulus processing, indicating that priming of a stimulus is a component of a switch cost. The switch cost in the partial-overlap condition, however, disappeared eventually with a long interval between two tasks, whereas the cost in the full-overlap condition remained significant. Moreover, the switch cost, in general, did not interact with foreknowledge, suggesting that preparation on the basis of foreknowledge may be related to processes beyond stimulus encoding. These results suggest that stimulus-related priming is automatic and short-lived and, therefore, is not a part of the persisting portion of switch cost.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Allport, D. A., & Wylie, G. R. (2000). Task-switching, stimulus-response bindings, and negative priming. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 35–70). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
De Jong, R. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 357–376). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dreisbach, G., Haider, H., & Kluwe, R. H. (2002). Preparatory processes in the task switching paradigm: Evidence from the use of probability cues.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 468–483.
Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model.Cognitive Psychology,44, 297–337.
Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift.Archives of Psychology, Whole No. 89.
Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 1423–1442.
Meiran, N. (2000). Reconfiguration of stimulus task-sets and response task-sets during task switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 377–399). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task-switching.Cognitive Psychology,41, 211–253.
Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Role of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited capacity attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,106, 226–254.
Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 207–231.
Rubinstein, J. S., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 763–797.
Ruthruff, E., Remington, R., & Johnston, J. C. (2001). Switching between simple cognitive tasks: The interaction of top-down and bottomup factors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 1404–1419.
Schvaneveldt, R., & Meyer, D. E. (1973). Retrieval and comparison processes in semantic memory. In S. Kornblum (Ed.),Attention and performance IV (pp. 421–452). New York: Academic Press.
Sohn, M.-H., & Andeson, J. R. (2001). Task preparation and task repetition: Two-component model of task switching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 764–778.
Sohn, M.-H., & Carlson, R. A. (2000). Effects of repetition and foreknowledge in task-set reconfiguration.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 1445–1460.
Sohn, M.-H., Ursu, S., Anderson, J. R., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2000). The role of prefrontal cortex and posterior parietal cortex in task-switching.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,97, 13448–13453.
Spector, A., & Biederman, I. (1976). Mental set and shift revisited.American Journal of Psychology,89, 669–697.
Wylie, G. R., & Allport, D. A. (2000). Task switching and the measurement of “switch costs.”Psychological Research,63, 212–233.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sohn, MH., Anderson, J.R. Stimulus-related priming during task switching. Memory & Cognition 31, 775–780 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196115
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196115